Jon Wilson wrote:
Hi Aziz,
Abdulaziz Ghuloum wrote:
Wouldn't this then make the implementation non-R6RS conforming?
Not necessarily. Implementations can provide implementation-specific
and nonstandard features. Such features may be completely missing
from the report (gui, threads, sockets, etc.) or even contradict the
report (lazy evaluation, static typing, no macros by default). An
implementation is R6RS-conforming as long as there is some way of
getting the R6RS-required features.
Fair enough. Thanks for clarifying that for me.
There's more, though. What should "portable Scheme libraries" consist of
and should they be useful in applications that emphasize interpretation as
contrasted with compilation?
-t
Regards,
Jon
_______________________________________________
r6rs-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.r6rs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/r6rs-discuss
_______________________________________________
r6rs-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.r6rs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/r6rs-discuss
